Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,057 Year: 5,314/9,624 Month: 339/323 Week: 183/160 Day: 0/19 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evidence for the Biblical Record
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 391 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 59 of 348 (550522)
03-16-2010 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Buzsaw
03-15-2010 6:48 PM


Re: Some Evidence Starters
That has not been verified because the Saudi's do no allow access to it by researchers. It must be understood that any research in the region is risky and dangerous, given the Muslim Saudis have no desire to support the Biblical record relative to anything supportive to Israel and Jews.
But the legend of Moses appears in the Quran. It is recounted at length in Sura 20, and again in Sura 26.
I'm sure any Muslim would love to have a scrap of a shred of evidence for the myth of Moses, because it's their myth as much as it is yours.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Buzsaw, posted 03-15-2010 6:48 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 391 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 60 of 348 (550526)
03-16-2010 1:04 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Peg
03-15-2010 7:31 PM


Re: For the sake of sanity.
the only way they can be refuted is by sceptics claiming that it was written after the fact... or added in later
Remember the book of Daniel... oh yeah! That was a complete forgery written in the 1st century LOL
If the only way a prophecy can be disproved is by claiming that it was added in later, then i dont think your analysis passes the sniff test.
Yeah. For example, here's an excerpt from the Book of Dr Adequate, which, as you can see from the text, was written in 1990.
And behold, in this year that is called 1990, Dr Adequate spake saying: Truly, I say unto you, in the reign of Bush who is son of Bush, even in the year 2001, in the month of September, then shall al-Qaeda smite at the Towers that are called Twin, and great shall be the lamentation of the people.
Now, one of those silly skeptics would say that there's no evidence that the Book of Dr Adequate was composed in 1990, and that this fact suggests that what we have here is a case of vaticinia ex eventu.
You, on the other hand, know that that's no refutation of my self-proclaimed magical powers, and are therefore compelled to believe that I am a bona fide prophet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Peg, posted 03-15-2010 7:31 PM Peg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Coyote, posted 03-16-2010 1:30 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 391 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 173 of 348 (550996)
03-20-2010 8:12 AM
Reply to: Message 123 by Buzsaw
03-17-2010 10:29 PM


The Book Of Revelation Is Not Fulfiled Prophecy
You seem to be claiming the Book of Revelation as a successful prophecy on the grounds that you are capable of daydreaming that one day something will happen which will vaguely resemble whatever it is the Book of Revelation is about.
Well, it's not an actual successful prophecy unless it comes true, OK? The fact that you can imagine something vaguely metaphorically kinda-like-but-not-really-like the events in Revelation happening at some point in the future is only a tribute to how vivid your imagination is and how much of the Book of Revelation you can manage to ignore, distort, misread, "interpret", or otherwise be wrong about.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Buzsaw, posted 03-17-2010 10:29 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Buzsaw, posted 03-20-2010 8:31 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 391 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 218 of 348 (551767)
03-24-2010 4:25 AM
Reply to: Message 210 by Peg
03-23-2010 4:16 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
yet its interesting that the Chinese character for ship is made up of eight people in a vessel.
That wouldn't even be very interesting if it was true.
As it is false, that removes any significance it might have had.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Peg, posted 03-23-2010 4:16 AM Peg has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 391 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 219 of 348 (551768)
03-24-2010 4:28 AM
Reply to: Message 217 by Peg
03-24-2010 4:13 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
the sign for 'mouth' in chinese i believe is representive of people, not animals.
Actually it's representative of mouths.
The word "duh" springs to mind.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 217 by Peg, posted 03-24-2010 4:13 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 220 by Peg, posted 03-24-2010 4:41 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 391 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 225 of 348 (551782)
03-24-2010 7:22 AM
Reply to: Message 223 by Huntard
03-24-2010 5:51 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Peg, if you don't know, then how can you be so entusiastic about the fact it syas "eight people in a vessel"? When in fact you don't know if it says that. It could say "eight mouths in a vessel"
Or "eight vessels in a mouth", or "a mouth in eight vessels", or "a vessel in eight mouths" or "eight mouths outside a vessel" ... the word order and the preposition are entirely invented by the apologists and have nothing to do with the actual Chinese character.
But their error is deeper even than that, because it is simply nonsense to try to read a single Chinese character as though it was a sentence.
The breadth and variety of subjects that fundamentalists can be wrong about is astonishing.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by Huntard, posted 03-24-2010 5:51 AM Huntard has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by Peg, posted 03-24-2010 11:39 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 391 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 227 of 348 (551785)
03-24-2010 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 210 by Peg
03-23-2010 4:16 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
I've just been looking at a list of Chinese radicals. The element of the character that you say means "mouth" actually means "erect, proud, upright", and the element that you say means "eight" actually means "small table".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 210 by Peg, posted 03-23-2010 4:16 AM Peg has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by Wounded King, posted 03-24-2010 8:28 AM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 233 by Peg, posted 03-24-2010 11:42 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 391 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 229 of 348 (551795)
03-24-2010 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 228 by Wounded King
03-24-2010 8:28 AM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
Well, "small table" is what they've written here:
However, I'll agree that they might have intended to write "eight". According to talkorigins, by the way, it actually means "divide".
As to the supposed "mouth" element, the "erect" element also is formed from three strokes, as you can see from the webpage I linked to. The only difference seems to be that "erect" is squarer and "mouth" is more oblong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by Wounded King, posted 03-24-2010 8:28 AM Wounded King has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by Wounded King, posted 03-24-2010 9:31 AM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 239 by Peg, posted 03-25-2010 7:25 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 391 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 291 of 348 (553659)
04-04-2010 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 288 by Peg
04-03-2010 11:42 PM


Re: Denial Of The Evidence
That is not my opinion. The bible is a record of human history not found anywhere else, it provides answers to questions not found anywhere else. It is in harmony with historical facts ...
I'm going to mention Noah's Flood again, and then I'm going to giggle.
Like my ass is it in harmony with historical fact. It is known, for certain, to be wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Peg, posted 04-03-2010 11:42 PM Peg has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by hERICtic, posted 04-04-2010 7:13 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024